Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 10. 1969 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1969)
Tanulmányok – Abhandlungen - Makkay János: The Late Neolithic Tordos Group of Sign. X, 1969. p. 9–49. t. I–IV.
similarity to the Mesopotamian cylinder seals could not be misunderstood by Zsófia Torma, could be the most important find for the interpretation and dating of the Tordos material and the Late Neolithic Tordos sign group generally. An important step towards this interpretation has been made by A. Nitu, 56 comparing, quite rightly, one of the singular Tordos signs (A 25,1) with a detail of a seal from the period Uruk III (C 25,1 and comparative table, no. 24). In our judgment the value of this parallel is enhanced by the fact that we are faced with the representation of an altar which is a special type even in Mesopotamia. The connections between the Mesopotamian pictographs and the Tordos sign group may be best interpreted through a combined comparison with the Tartäria pictographs. We try to compare 24 forms of signs on this occasion. Among them there is a complete coincidence, both as to the Tartarian and the Tordos signs, with the Mesopotamian pictographs in ten occurrences (comparative table 1, 3, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 20), which is a very good proportion in view of the very small number of the Tartäria signs and other circumstances. Of these type no. 1 has a much nearer and more appropriate pictograph parallel than that given by Falkenstein (ATU 260); it is among the Jemdet Nasr pictographs. 57 The same statement is valid for parallel no. 10. The formally very convincing similarity of parallel no. 11 is lessened by the consideration that the signs of the Tordos group of such character probably represent genital organs of female clay idols (though in one case the sign is visible on the back of the female idol and the genital organ in front is also portrayed, A10, 1, 10, 11). On the other hand, none of the available pictographic parallels can be interpreted in this manner (C10, 1, 2, 8,10). As to type no. 12, we do not know any parallel from the Tordos sign group, not even from Tordos. We have outlined our opinion on this type in more detail at another occasion, 58 since it has probably a decisive part in solving the Tartäria problem and, indirectly, in interpreting the whole Tordos sign group. Types 13 and 15 are good analogies between Tartäria, the Tordos sign group and the Mesopotamian pictographs. In the case of type 16 we may complete Falkenstein's ATU-parallels by a further ATU-sign, formally more comparable both to the of Tartäria and the Tordos group of signs (ATU 644). Type 21 shows a triple analogy, even a multiple one. This type, composed of two members, is found in all the three groups. One of the members is the above-mentioned type no. 16. The Tartäria and Tordos group occurrences have a ADFUW5 = Ch. Ziegler: Die Keramik von der Qal'a des Haggi Mohammed. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka, Bd. 5, Berlin 1953. AMIET = P. Amiet: La glyptique mésopotamienne archaïque. Paris 1961. BAGHOUZ = Le comte du Mesnil du Buisson: Baghouz, l'ancienne Corsôtê. Leiden 1948. G. BAKÓ, SCIV 19.1968 = Bakó Géza: Représentations néolithiques de Ditrau. Studii si Çerçetari de Istorie Veche 19, Bucuresti, 1968. 56 Reprezentarea,fig. 2. s? OECT VII. PI. XXXIX, 1964, flat side. s» Orientalia 37 (1968) 279. nearer parallel, type ATU 644; the Jemdet Nasr pictograph corresponding to it is interpreted by Langdon as "house", "palace", "temple", and by Jaritz as "Eine oben spitz zusammenlaufende Rohrhütte" (C37, 9, or C37, 8). In all three cases a pictograph representing the head of an animal accompanies this sign no. 16. We called this head an independent type, no. 20. Therefore type no. 21 unites, in our judgment, a sign depicting a building, house, or temple, and above or beside it the head of an animal (bull). We regard this union as extremely typical of both the Early Mesopotamian and the Vinca—Tordos culture, since we know huts or buildings of wattle-and-daub from the Vinca—Tordos or early Vinca—Plocnik period which are crowned by a wholly earthen animal head, or one which covered the skull with clay. Similar Mesopotamian constructions are evidenced by both archaeological finds and written sources, either as regards the head of a horned animal or a sheep. 59 Thus we suggest that the buildings topped by animal heads used to be the sanctuaries of the little settlements in general, whereas sign no. 21 is the pictograph of the sanctuary, the temple, both in the Mesopotamian and the Vinca culture. It is uderstandable that there cannot be more close parallel between two so remote areas or cultures, which had attained very differrent levels of cultural development. It might be possible that such sanctuaries, crowned by animal heads, may have come into being both in Mesopotamia and the Vinca culture, independently of each other. However, it is unlikely that similarly conceined pictographs would have been invented independently, and precisely in South-Eastern Europe, at Tordos, in the Vinca culture, in the same age as the Tartäria tablets. Consequently we regard the Tordos sign of type no. 21 and all those marks of the Tordos group of signs which are contained in our comparative table, as contemporaries of the Tartäria tablets (thus necessarily earlier than the Vinca—Plocnik period) and we suppose a like origin. This may mean either direct Mesopotamian impacts contemporary with the Tartäria phenomenon, or mediations through an influence exerted directly on Tartäria. Therefore we cannot regard the undoubtedly individual Tartarian influence (perhaps attributable to a certain person) as a unique one, not even in the framework of the period Vinca —Tordos Bl —2. The impacts mentioned are connected with a historical background which is very scantily known so far but which remains in any case to be illuminated by further research. /. Makkay BANJICA = /. Todorovic — A. Certnanovic: Banjica. Siedlung der Vinca-Gruppe. Beograd 1961. J. BANNER, Acta Arch. Hung. 12, 1960 = The Neolithic Settlement on the Kremenjak Hill at Csóka (Сока). The Excavations of F. Móra in the Years 1907 to 1913. Acta Arch. Hung. 12, 1960, 1-56. BKU = F. Tompa: Die Bandkeramik in Ungarn. Archaeologia Hungarica 5 — 6, Budapest 1929. BRGK 39, 1958 = M. V. Garasanin: Neolithikum und Bron59 J. MAKKAY: Arch. Ért. 1959. 130, note 64; N. K. SANDARS: Prehistoric Art in Europe. (Harmondsworth 1968) 120. See on this problem our manuscript study! I am very grateful to Mr. W. C. Brice for his help in kindly supervising the whole English version of my article. ABBREVIATIONS 15
